Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.532
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL HUKUM Jurisprudence Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum LEGALITY The Spirit of Society Journal : International Journal of Society Development and Engagement KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Jurnal Dedikasi Hukum Abdi Cendekia: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Hukum Pidana dan Pembangunan Hukum Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Business RechtIdee
Shinta Ayu Purnamawati
Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang
Religion Aerospace Engineering Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Astronomy Automotive Engineering Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Chemistry Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Control & Systems Engineering Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Dentistry Earth & Planetary Sciences Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Electrical & Electronics Engineering Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Immunology & microbiology Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Mathematics Mechanical Engineering Medicine & Pharmacology Neuroscience Nursing Physics Public Health Social Sciences Transportation Veterinary Other

Published : 14 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 14 Documents
Search

 1   2 
The Dialectics of TheoLogis and TheoLegis in the Meaning of Justice Sunaryo, Sidik; Purnamawati, Shinta Ayu; Arifin, Ridwan
Legality : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Vol. 34 No. 1 (2026): March
Publisher : Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Malang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22219/ljih.v34i1.44016

Abstract

This article examines the meaning of justice through the dialectical relationship between TheoLogis justice and TheoLegis justice as two epistemological horizons in shaping and enforcing law. The study seeks to clarify the interaction between transcendental moral values and comprehensive understanding of justice through legal reasoning within contemporary legal systems. TheoLogis justice is conceptualised as a value orientation grounded in divine revelation and moral theology, providing law with a transcendental ethical foundation. However, when detached from epistemic humility, TheoLogis justice may risk formalisation and authoritarian domination. By contrast, TheoLegis justice situates legal rationality, social experience, and human values as mediating instruments through which divine values are translated into rational, contextual, and publicly accountable legal norms. Using a legal philosophy and legal theology approach, this study demonstrates that justice does not emerge as a fixed or singular concept but as a dialectical process between text and context, between the universality of values and the plurality of social realities. Within the Indonesian context, TheoLegis synthesis acquires constitutional significance through Pancasila, which integrates divine values, humanity, and social justice without reducing law to either secular positivism or normative theocracy. The main contribution of this article is the formulation of the TheoLogis-TheoLegis framework as an alternative conceptual approach for interpreting justice in pluralistic legal systems. In this framework, TheoLegis justice functions as an epistemological bridge that translates transcendental values into rational legal reasoning, enabling law to operate not merely as a coercive instrument but as a form of practical wisdom oriented toward human dignity, social balance, and substantive justice.
Pendampingan Hukum Pro Bono oleh Penasihat Hukum dalam Perkara Pidana (Studi Kasus Pendampingan Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Pencurian dengan Kekerasan di Pengadilan Negeri Malang) Akbar Mahredy Novanda Putra; Anggi Kaswari; Shasa Satu Widharu; Tinuk Dwi Cahyani; Shinta Ayu Purnamawati
Abdi Cendekia : Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Vol 5 No 2 (2026): Juni
Publisher : Yayasan Zia Salsabila

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61253/abdicendekia.v5i2.671

Abstract

Akses terhadap keadilan merupakan hak konstitusional setiap warga negara, termasuk bagi masyarakat kurang mampu yang berhadapan dengan proses hukum pidana. Namun dalam praktiknya, kelompok masyarakat rentan masih menghadapi berbagai hambatan untuk memperoleh pendampingan hukum yang layak akibat keterbatasan ekonomi, rendahnya literasi hukum, dan minimnya akses informasi mengenai bantuan hukum gratis. Kondisi tersebut tercermin dalam perkara pidana yang melibatkan terdakwa berinisial RST, seorang pemuda dari keluarga tidak mampu di Kabupaten Malang yang didakwa melakukan tindak pidana pencurian dengan kekerasan berdasarkan Undang Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang Undang Hukum Pidana. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis pelaksanaan pendampingan hukum oleh Pusat Bantuan Hukum (PBH) PERADI Malang sebagai bentuk pengabdian masyarakat di bidang hukum sekaligus mengkaji peran bantuan hukum dalam mewujudkan access to justice bagi terdakwa tidak mampu. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis empiris dengan pendekatan socio legal. Data diperoleh melalui observasi, wawancara, studi dokumentasi, dan studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang undangan serta literatur hukum yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pendampingan hukum yang dilakukan oleh advokat dan paralegal PBH PERADI Malang tidak hanya berfungsi sebagai pembelaan litigasi, tetapi juga menjadi sarana edukasi hukum bagi terdakwa dan keluarganya. Pendampingan tersebut memberikan pemahaman mengenai hak prosedural, memperkuat posisi terdakwa dalam proses persidangan, serta membantu mengurangi ketimpangan akses hukum yang dialami masyarakat kurang mampu. Penelitian ini menegaskan bahwa bantuan hukum memiliki fungsi strategis sebagai instrumen perlindungan hak asasi manusia sekaligus sebagai bentuk pemberdayaan masyarakat dalam mewujudkan sistem peradilan pidana yang lebih adil, inklusif, dan humanis.
Child Data Protection and Commercial Sharenting: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Indonesia and Egypt Qoneta Masusiyah; Kana Zahra Alma Sayogi; Eksytania Khaila Gisca Nugroho; Shinta Ayu Purnamawati; Muhammad Ahsin Lana
RechtIdee Vol 21, No 1 (2026): JUNE
Publisher : Trunojoyo Madura University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21107/ri.v21i1.32358

Abstract

Study Objectives: This article compares Indonesian and Egyptian law to assess how each jurisdiction protects children whose images, identities, locations, emotions, and behavioral traces are disclosed or monetized online.Method/Approach: The study uses normative legal research, including statute, conceptual, and functional comparative approaches.Novelty: It compares Indonesian constitutional guarantees, the Child Protection Law, the Personal Data Protection Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, materials with Egypt’s Personal Data Protection Law No. 151 of 2020 and Executive Regulations No. 816 of 2025, read against the Convention on the Rights of the Child and General Comment No. 25.Findings: The article finds that Indonesia has developed a more explicit child-online-safety framework for electronic-system providers, including age-appropriate design, high privacy settings, risk assessment, and reporting duties. Egypt provides greater operational precision in data processing, notably by treating children’s data as sensitive and requiring explicit,  written consent from a guardian for children under 15. Both systems nevertheless leave a regulatory gap where parental authority, commercial sharenting, and platform monetization are.Conclusion: The article proposes a child-centered compliance model that combines age-sensitive assent, guardian consent, a best-interests assessment for commercial child content, traceable takedown procedures, and platform duties to prevent profiling, amplification, and reuse of high-risk child data.
The Ultimum Remedium Doctrine and The Absolute Obligation to Treat: Constructing A Normative Line of Demarcation in Emergency Department Services Abu Sufyan; Shinta Ayu Purnamawati; Surya Anoraga; Tongat
KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Vol. 20 No. 2 (2026): KRTHA BHAYANGKARA: AUGUST 2026
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/krtha.v20i2.5566

Abstract

This study examines the normative tension between the absolute prohibition on refusing emergency patients under the Health Law and the subsidiarity principle of the National Criminal Code, which treats criminal punishment as a measure of last resort (ultimum remedium). The tension arises because the Health Law admits no explicit exception for resource constraints, whereas the Criminal Code requires criminal instruments to be activated only after non-criminal avenues fail, leaving Emergency Department (ED) staff exposed to legal uncertainty amid overload, limited specialists, and equipment shortages. Unlike prior studies examining patient refusal or medical negligence separately, this study’s novelty lies in integrating the ultimum remedium doctrine with the absolute obligation to treat, to construct a normative line of demarcation between criminally actionable refusal and medically justifiable delay. The study uses an empirical juridical method combining statutory, conceptual, historical, and socio-legal approaches; primary data were obtained through in-depth interviews, observation, and documentation involving six informants at a Type B hospital in Banyuwangi, analyzed using an interactive model. Findings show that delays attributable to triage, overload, facility limitations, and documented referral procedures do not constitute criminally actionable refusal; criminal prosecution is warranted only where there is demonstrable intent, gross negligence, or disregard for patient safety without valid medical grounds. Accordingly, this study formulates a normative line of demarcation based on six assessment parameters: the presence of initial emergency care, the mens rea element, the medical and procedural basis, completeness of documentation, a proportionate legal response, and the relevant normative foundation.
Co-Authors Abu Sufyan Akbar Mahredy Novanda Putra Anggi Kaswari Dini Wahyuni Eksytania Khaila Gisca Nugroho Endah Lestari Endah Lestari Dwirokhmeiti Endah Lestari Dwirokhmeiti Haris Thofly Kana Zahra Alma Sayogi Lucky MH SH. Endrawati M. Jihadi Muhammad Ahsin Lana Muhammad Jihadi Ningsih, Nur Endah Sri Nurini Aprilianda Qoneta Masusiyah Rahmawati Khadijah Maro Ramadhan, Mohammad Kenan Athala Ridwan Arifin Shasa Satu Widharu Sholahuddin Al-Fatih Sidik Sunaryo Sulistiyo, Faizin Surya Anoraga Tinuk Dwi Cahyani Tongat Tongat Woro Winandi Woro Winandi